I have always disliked the weakness of pawns in chess, and their
common use as gambits. They deserve better! So I would
like to suggest this modest variation: replace the pawns
with "superpawns" or what I like to call hobbits.
These sturdy little fellows can move one space orthogonally
forwards, sideways, or backwards, and take one space diagonally
forwards or backwards. You will think twice about
sacrificing a hobbit!

If you would like a more dramatic variant along the same lines,
may I suggest the 9 by 9 version shown below. On the first
rank, we have a rook, knight, bishop, queen, king, a second queen, bishop, knight,
and rook; On the second rank, we have nine hobbits.
This is my own favorite because it combines everything I like
best: 18 powerful pieces and the wide-open spaces of the 9
by 9 board. If you enjoy the middle game of chess more than
the end game, this is one to try!

In either form, I would suggest not permitting the promotion of
the hobbits: They are strong enough as it is. You
might also want to agree on a rule forbidding "stalling," i.e.
moving a piece in one turn, and returning it to its former space
in the next. A king under check should be the one exception.

If you prefer not having all bishops on the same color squares, I
suggest a simple rule: In place of a regular move, a bishop
and his neighboring knight may switch positions -- a sort of
bishop-knight "castling." It should be restricted to pieces
which have not yet been moved, but I think it would be interesting
to allow both sets of bishops and knights to switch (at separate
times, of course), if the player wants.

One more interesting variation: "Simultaneous 9 by 9 Hobbit
Chess." Like Diplomacy and Diplomacy Chess, both players
write down their move and reveal them simultaneously. The
two pieces are moved accordingly. The moves must be legal, of
course, but the pieces may pass through the same squares. If
both land at the same square, both are removed. The king may
actually move into check, since he is not thereby necessarily
lost. But beware: The king may indeed be lost if he moves
into a square simultaneously with an opposing piece!

[We all know that chess players are pretty serious folk, and
wouldn't be caught dead being silly. Silly people would have
wizards instead of kings -- Gandalf versus Sauron! The white
queen would be elvish -- Galadriel or Arwen? The black queen
would be Shelob, of course, the giant spider. Bishops would
be dwarves and dragons. Knights would be men -- Aragorn and
Boromir, perhaps -- and the frightening NazgŻl. The white
rooks would have to be ents, the black rooks trolls. And of
course the pawns would be hobbits and orcs -- and the white king's
pawn would be Frodo himself! But that would be silly,
wouldn't it? Yeah. Forget I brought it up.]